The push to “streamline” and consolidate the structures
of the AFL-CIO threatens to diminish the influence of Blacks in
the labor
movement. “They want bigger unions,” said Bill Lucy,
head of the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists (CBTU), referring
to leaders of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU),
the Teamsters and others. “They want power players, big
unions in charge. The end result is diminution of community power.”

Blacks make up about 30 percent of organized
labor, concentrated in the urban centers, says Lucy, who is also
Secretary-Treasurer
of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
(AFSCME). However, the proposed AFL-CIO restructuring would concentrate
power and resources in the headquarters of a few large union chiefs,
and away from the metropolitan area Central Labor Councils. “Our
fortunes lie at the local level. Most of the national leaders are
talking about getting a bigger ‘bang for the buck.’ We lose out
on this.”

The driving force behind revamping the AFL-CIO
is Andrew Stern, president of SEIU, the nation’s largest and fastest growing union,
with 1.6 million members. Stern has threatened to pull out of the
labor federation if it does not essentially replicate the measures
he has taken in his own union, where many locals have been forced
to merge and the Washington headquarters maintains tight reins
on resources and decision making. Stern’s plan – which many in
labor consider to be a kind of ultimatum – would rationalize union
activity by grouping members according to trade and, ultimately,
eliminate all but 20 of the AFL-CIO’s 60 unions, altogether. “We
are divided within industries and employers as union members who
do the same work often are divided into multiple unions that do
not have a coordinated strategy,” wrote Stern, in a 10-point document
titled, Unite
To Win. Teamsters union president James P. Hoffa would go further
than his ally, Stern, eliminating all
but 15 of the federation’s executive council members.

Noting that “there has been very little discussion among the rank
and filers” on the sweeping changes demanded by Stern and his allies,
CBTU leader Bill Lucy warned that “it would be a serious ‘omission’ for
any of the sincere and articulate advocates of reform to assume
what is in the best interest of black trade unionists and the coalition
partners with whom we work regularly.”

Lucy is the first to point out that “the structure of the AFL-CIO
is nonproductive in the areas of political action and community
outreach,” but views the Stern-Hoffa alternatives as even more
inimical to Black interests. In a position paper titled, The Future
of Organized Labor, Lucy writes:

”I would strongly suggest that the Federation
leadership resist the call to reduce the size of the Executive
Council. The added size of the Council bears no relationship
to the decline in labor fortunes. Those who suggest that its
size affects the ability to have substantive debate, to a degree
reflect our overall problem. I do not believe labor’s problem
revolves around structure. I believe to the extent we have a
problem, it is around mission. If we define our mission, our
mission will dictate the necessary structure. While the composition
of the Executive Council may be large, it reflects who we want
to organize, mobilize and politicize.”

Black unionists fear that Central Labor Councils,
so important to urban organizing and community outreach, will
become mere
extensions of the Federation’s national headquarters’ campaigns.
There is much reason for anxiety. Andrew Stern has made clear
that he envisions a streamlined and consolidated labor engine
that responds to top union management in much the same way as
corporations operate – the better to beat the companies at their
own level of play. But white executives’ ideas of efficiency
seldom encompass the problems and imperatives of Black America – and
are antithetical to any notion of general Black empowerment.

“If you go to Newark, you’ll find plenty of people who want
to be organized,” says Bill Lucy, “but who is going to organize
them? The Central Labor Councils will. Place [resources] at the
local level so that the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists can
go out and organize.”

The SEIU’s record of organizing the unorganized is impressive – especially
among Latinos. But structures that do not institutionally empower
African Americans are unacceptable – including in the House of
Labor.

Twelve unions responded to AFL-CIO chief
John Sweeney’s call
for position
papers on restructuring, for discussion at the Federation’s
executive council meeting, in March, and action at the Federation’s
convention, in July. “While there have been different positions
coming from the international unions, we [Black unionists] aren’t
at the table,” says Pat Ford, a former executive vice president
of SEIU, now head of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation. “What
impact does this have on people of color and women?”

There is, literally, nothing in the SEIU-Teamsters
proposals or those submitted by any other international union,
that establishes
formal mechanisms for Blacks – acting as both unionists andAfrican
Americans – to effectively participate in shaping the agenda
under labor’s proposed new incarnation. The same applies to other
constituent components of labor – Latinos, Asian Pacific Americans,
women, gays and lesbians – who submitted to Sweeney a joint “Unity
Statement”:

”We are concerned about the continuing lack
of diversity among various leadership bodies within the AFL-CIO,
affiliated unions, state federations, central labor councils,
and local unions. We are also concerned about the proposals to
drastically reduce the size of the AFL-CIO executive council
without a strong commitment to maintain and increase diversity. Representation
of constituency groups must be ensured.”

The statement was endorsed by the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists, A. Philip Randolph
Institute, Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance, Coalition
of Labor Union Women, Labor Council for Latin American Advancement,
and Pride At Work – representing constituencies that decisively
outnumber white males among the 13 million members of the
AFL-CIO, and in the working population as a whole. In the
absence of meaningful participation by the “constituency
affiliates” of the Federation, restructuring becomes a white
man’s game, and “community outreach” an empty phrase.

”In conclusion, we believe that ‘Full Participation” is
more than a worthwhile slogan. In order to achieve the potential
of a strong, unified labor movement, we must all fully participate
in governance and the development of labor’s agenda. The constituency
organizations of the AFL-CIO are eager to work side by side with
union leaders to organize, educate, and empower all workers. Building
a more powerful and more inclusive labor movement requires labor’s
commitment to diversity, and active implementation of full participation.”

Crisis within a crisis

For Black trade unionists, the struggle against racism is paramount,
and allows no one a free pass based on otherwise progressive
credentials. If organized labor is to be of any real value in
the coming battle for democratic
development of the cities – the fight against rampant gentrification
and minority displacement, and for development that serves the
needs of current populations – it must provide more, rather than
less, resources and latitude to the Central Labor Councils. It
is commendable that SEIU’s Andrew Stern has pledged to commit
millions to unionize Wal-Mart, for example, but who will organize
the citizens of the inner cities to resist penetration by the
corporate “death star” chain that negates all development but
itself? That’s a job for the heavily Black and Latino locals,
through their Central Labor Councils – not Andrew Stern’s or
James Hoffa’s.

Bill Lucy’s Coalition of Black Trade Unionists, founded in 1972,
with 50 chapters nationwide and in Canada representing members
in 50 international unions, faces marginalization in its own
house under the Stern-Hoffa proposals. “From the point of view
of the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists, the current debate
over the status of the American labor movement fails to focus
on some very real and critical issues that must be addressed,” says
the CBTU statement. “Whether it’s organizing, political action,
legislative initiatives or effective collective bargaining, none
of the goals can be totally achieved without broad support from
labor’s allies at every level of our political systems – national,
regional, local and down to the community level.”

The CBTU proposes that:

1. In whatever restructuring occurs within
the AFL-CIO, there must be a department charged with the
responsibility of building
formal relationships with community allies and community institutions
on behalf of organized labor. Constituent group leadership
and structure should be integrated into this activity.

2. City central labor councils must be structured to play
a major support role in organizing and political action, formally
engaging with our community allies.

3. These labor council activities should be
underwritten by the AFL-CIO with leadership staff assigned or
appointed in conjunction with labor council leadership.

In an effort to overcome the crisis in the
American labor movement, “reformers” have
induced a crisis for Black labor, a subject that will consume
much of the CBTU’s 34th International
Convention, May 25-30, in Phoenix, Arizona.

“The need to adapt the labor movement for the 21st century has
been discussed for years, but previous leaders failed to act,
and workers paid the price,” writes the SEIU’s Andrew Stern,
in his 10-point proposal. “American workers cannot afford
to wait any longer.” But Stern has not paused to consider
that his grand plan cannot possibly succeed if it excludes the
most active and committed labor constituency: African Americans.